IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 54677 OF 2018 (LB-RES)

BETWEEN:

SMT. SHASHIYAMMA @ SHASIKALA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS W/O RAMANNA R/AT VENKATAPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. GURUPRASAD C. REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHANDRASHEKARA REDDY M V., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPT. OF PANCHAYATH RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIKAS SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BANGALORE-560 001.

Digitally signed by 2. HOSKOTE TALUK PANCHAYAT SUMA REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER Location: HOSKOTE TALUK, HIGH BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 COURT OF KARNATAKA

3. LAKKONDAHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYAT REPRESENTED BY ITS PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562114

4. CHANNAKESHAVA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA R/AT VENKATAPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT AMENDED VIDE ORDER DATED 13.01.2023 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. BOPANNA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;

SRI. M.S.DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3;

SRI. S.N.SAMEER, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH RESOLUTION DT.NIL PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 AS PER ANNEXURE-N BY DECLARING SAME AS OPPOSED TO LAW AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has sought for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the resolution dated Nil passed by respondent No.2 (Annexure - N) and to direct respondent No.3 to restore her name in the property register in respect of the property bearing Khatha No.375 of Venkatapura Village, Kasaba Hobli, Hosakote Taluk.

2. (i) The petitioner claims that she is the absolute owner of the property bearing janjaru No.375/property No.375 situated at Venkatapura village, Kasaba Hobli, Hoskote Taluk, Bengaluru rural district.

(ii) The petitioner claimed that the aforesaid property belonged to the State Government and that she was in long- standing and continuous possession of the property, which was recognized by the Panchayat by issuance of a possession certificate. The petitioner claims that based on the said possession certificate, her name was entered in the property register after the property was assessed to property tax for the year 2009 -2010.

(iii) She claims that thereafter a house-list number was assigned to the property and property tax was demanded from time to time, which she paid. When things stood thus, some strangers attempted to disturb her possession which compelled her to file O.S.No.61/2013 before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoskote wherein an order of interim injunction was granted vide order dated 28.08.2014. During the pendency of the suit, the defendants again attempted to interfere with her possession and after verification she found that the Khatha standing in her name was cancelled. She further submits that at a meeting of the executive committee of respondent No.2, the Khatha that stood in the name of the petitioner was cancelled, pursuant to which respondent No.3 scored off the entries in her name in the property tax demand register and tax assessment register etc., 3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said cancellation is before this Court primarily contending that she was not heard before respondent Nos.2 and 3 resolved to cancel the Khatha.

4. (i) The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above contentions and submited that the petitioner ought to have been heard before the Khatha that stood in her name was revoked. He submits that the suit filed by the petitioner in O.S.No.61/2013 for perpetual injunction was decreed and therefore, there is sufficient material to establish that the petitioner was in possession of the property.

(ii) He further con